• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

Discussion Socialism Discussion Thread

Reader mode
Biden ran on giving the police more funding, unfortunately this isn't even just a u-turn, even when Floyd was in full effect he was all blue-lives matter.
 
Oheao said:
Biden ran on giving the police more funding, unfortunately this isn't even just a u-turn, even when Floyd was in full effect he was all blue-lives matter.
Click to expand...
The reality is no elected Democrat will ever allow themselves to be painted as anti-police. Not even Sanders supported Defund The Police.
Army of Light said:
When it comes to sanctions I feel like we got to do something. I don't know what but we got to do something. I think one thing that might help is being willing to take refugees, any refugees that come along. We got to be really open to refugees if we're going to involve ourselves in any way in these conflicts. If we make people refugees we got to take refugees.
Click to expand...
It would be a wonderful project for America to use its vast wealth to be a sanctuary country for refugees, but I would imagine the vast majority of people do not want to leave their country and would prefer the sanctions stop. I agree though, it would be nice if at least in the short term we didn't make life hell for refugees.
 
Oheao said:
Biden ran on giving the police more funding, unfortunately this isn't even just a u-turn, even when Floyd was in full effect he was all blue-lives matter.
Click to expand...
Boy, it sure was great when the Denocrats just... stopped running primaries before they even reached my state. Love that! It truly is wonderful that the US system has so many bizarre quirks that exists to disenfranchise huge swaths of people over a neoliberal at best upper class.

Like damn, I'm not saying that Bernie would be the solution to all of our problems, but at least let me vote for the dang guy before pulling the rug from out under me.
 
Army of Light said:
When it comes to sanctions I feel like we got to do something. I don't know what but we got to do something. I think one thing that might help is being willing to take refugees, any refugees that come along. We got to be really open to refugees if we're going to involve ourselves in any way in these conflicts. If we make people refugees we got to take refugees.
Click to expand...
This is the best foreign policy that could be taken up to help Ukraine. Poland opening up its borders to Ukraine was a really good move they did but its really soured when you see people get put through the paperbag test to be let through and compare the overall international sentiment to Ukrainian refugees to how Syrian refugees were treated.
 
Mekanos said:
Socialism is when you support NATO

btw do NOT look up who the guy is on the front left of this picture and what he did after WW2

Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-B24543%2C_Hauptquartier_Heeresgruppe_S%C3%BCd%2C_Lagebesprechung.jpg
Click to expand...
Is this Adolf Heusinger?
NarohDethan said:


bIdEn iS tO tHe LeFt oF oBaMa
Click to expand...

Fuck this man for coopting an entire movement without actually making the country any safer for victims of police violence.

lefteast.org

“My pink socialism became red as a wound”: Impossible interview from Ukraine - Lefteast

In 2000s Ukraine, Anatoli Ulyanov co-made online media dedicated to art, culture, and politics, and became recognized for his provocative writing style. After a series of violent attacks from the government-hired right-wing mercenaries, in 2009 Anatoli and his partner Natasha Masharova were...
lefteast.org lefteast.org

A.U.: I see no deficit of left ideas in the U.S. The bigger problem here is how authorities deal with these ideas. In Ukraine, they suppress them with violence and prohibition. In the U.S., the system simply co-opts everything. I won’t be surprised if it can absorb cannibals into moderate centrists.

The Democratic Party has its house socialists, appropriates left slogans, and reduces it all to moral exclamations within identity politics. It disarms the left by turning their agenda into a shiny sticker on the façade of the status quo.

We are used to seeing our enemies as conservative and aggressive men who are stuck in the past of their caves. But in the U.S. the major villains are people like Bezos or Musk whose “caves” are covered with rainbow flags, the BLM fists, and the MeToo hashtags. They are fluent in the new ethics, understand the progressive rhetoric, know whom to cancel, and they drink the blood of their workers with a welcoming smile, inclusively.
Click to expand...
 
We really need to make a 'Gundam shooting a message over weeb's head' saying 'It's not that we oppose the right of Ukraine to defend itself it's just that we've seen time and again that NATO will take any chance to increase their imperialistic stances and any help should be seen with extreme skepticism' and 'WOW SO YOU SIDE WITH PUTIN?!'
 
I think the wildest takes we've seen the last few days are not even the "NATO is not good but" ones but the "Nuclear winter is not so bad actually" ones, it doesn't stop to impress me
 
Awena said:
I think the wildest takes we've seen the last few days are not even the "NATO is not good but" ones but the "Nuclear winter is not so bad actually" ones, it doesn't stop to impress me
Click to expand...
The fact that Zelensky asked for US/NATO to enforce a no fly zone in Ukraine really makes me question his credentials, given that would basically be an act of war between two nuclear superpowers.
 
Mekanos said:
The fact that Zelensky asked for US/NATO to enforce a no fly zone in Ukraine really makes me question his credentials, given that would basically be an act of war between two nuclear superpowers.
Click to expand...
Yeah exactly, and lot of people in western media are also asking for a no fly zone (I've seen it especially in the british media). Bellicist discourse is in full swing
 
Last edited:
British media commentators and politicians seem really eager for a bit of nuclear war, as a treat. Gotta be a better outlet for that collective mid-life crisis.
 
Zellia said:
British media commentators and politicians seem really eager for a bit of nuclear war, as a treat. Gotta be a better outlet for that collective mid-life crisis.
Click to expand...
Which is ironic considering they were all sure Corbyn would cause the apocalypse
 
Mekanos said:
Which is ironic considering they were all sure Corbyn would cause the apocalypse
Click to expand...

Ha!

Let's not forget the roasting he got for daring to hesitate to saying yes for pressing the red button from the old gammons in the audience during Question Time on the BBC.

iu


And there being one lady in the audience being like 'the fuck?' after they were all saying 'press the red button, why wouldn't you?'
 
Honestly do not think any libs understand the fire they are playing with by continuously using sanctions to wage economic warfare against every single country they feel confident in fucking with. This is accelerating the inevitable day when the Yuan becomes the default reserve currency and a lot of libs are just gonna be pikachushock.jpg when US sanctions stop being a weapon they can use to bully the poor worldwide.
 
Branduil said:
Honestly do not think any libs understand the fire they are playing with by continuously using sanctions to wage economic warfare against every single country they feel confident in fucking with. This is accelerating the inevitable day when the Yuan becomes the default reserve currency and a lot of libs are just gonna be pikachushock.jpg when US sanctions stop being a weapon they can use to bully the poor worldwide.
Click to expand...
I really think economically and politically isolating Russia the same way we did with North Korea is a really, really dangerous game to play, and I'm not sure most of the world governments realize that. I genuinely think the fall of the Soviet Union made America and its allies far too cocky to be able to just stomp around and do whatever they want to "bad" countries with no real resistance, and this could bite us in the ass in the long run. There is a reason why sanctioning a nuclear superpower to this extent has never been done before.
 
Mekanos said:
I really think economically and politically isolating Russia the same way we did with North Korea is a really, really dangerous game to play, and I'm not sure most of the world governments realize that. I genuinely think the fall of the Soviet Union made America and its allies far too cocky to be able to just stomp around and do whatever they want to "bad" countries with no real resistance, and this could bite us in the ass in the long run. There is a reason why sanctioning a nuclear superpower to this extent has never been done before.
Click to expand...
I think the danger zone for shit getting real is if Russia withdraws/signs an armistice with Ukraine, but Putin is still in power, and the west refuses to lift sanctions. And I absolutely believe the US will try to keep sanctions on regardless of what happens in Ukraine at this point.
 
So, the economic sanctions being placed on Russia...don't seem to really be working, huh? Let's ignore the hypocracy of putting sanctions on Russia, a hyperagressive nation encroaching on a neighboring nation, but doing nothing against Israel, another hyperagressive nation encroaching on a neighboring nation. We know why that's the case. Let's focus solely on its effectiveness. All the big corporations pulling out, things like Google or PayPal, seem to primarily hurt the average Russian citizen without stopping the war or affecting the people in power pushing for and continuing military action. Then we just have different groups basically blocking or banning anything related to Russia, which serves...what purpose, exactly?

Russia is the clear aggressor here. I'm not defending the actions of its government or its military, and I firmly want Ukraine to pull through here. I also will readily admit that I have lots to learn when it comes to global politics. But I don't see how this is actually stopping Russia's military action.
 
VolcanicDynamo said:
So, the economic sanctions being placed on Russia...don't seem to really be working, huh? Let's ignore the hypocracy of putting sanctions on Russia, a hyperagressive nation encroaching on a neighboring nation, but doing nothing against Israel, another hyperagressive nation encroaching on a neighboring nation. We know why that's the case. Let's focus solely on its effectiveness. All the big corporations pulling out, things like Google or PayPal, seem to primarily hurt the average Russian citizen without stopping the war or affecting the people in power pushing for and continuing military action. Then we just have different groups basically blocking or banning anything related to Russia, which serves...what purpose, exactly?

Russia is the clear aggressor here. I'm not defending the actions of its government or its military, and I firmly want Ukraine to pull through here. I also will readily admit that I have lots to learn when it comes to global politics. But I don't see how this is actually stopping Russia's military action.
Click to expand...
Its not and its sad because I've seen people who exist in Russia who don't support the war or putin who are unable to receive the income they work with.

Its also fucked over people who have tried to flee. It all and well sucks and I'm hoping the best for them (And an end to this shitty war).
 
Branduil said:
I think the danger zone for shit getting real is if Russia withdraws/signs an armistice with Ukraine, but Putin is still in power, and the west refuses to lift sanctions. And I absolutely believe the US will try to keep sanctions on regardless of what happens in Ukraine at this point.
Click to expand...
If history is anything to go by, of course they will. The fallout of this is going to be a shitshow full of hypocrisy.
 


I don't think what is happening in Afghanistan can be described as anything but genocide. The Biden administration is facilitating this.
 
South Korea what are you doing. I thought the libs in charge were quite popular?
 
NarohDethan said:
South Korea what are you doing. I thought the libs in charge were quite popular?
Click to expand...
South Korea is a deeply socially conservative country, especially in regards to sexism. Yoon Suk-Yeol effectively leveraged that in the same way conservatives always do. It doesn't help that this is a country that arose out of a military dictatorship after suppressing its left-wing movement.
 
Americans, I have to ask you something, I know millions of Americans don't trust the federal government, so would UHC actually work over there?
I don't see a reason why it shouldn't exist.
 
Mekanos said:


I don't think what is happening in Afghanistan can be described as anything but genocide. The Biden administration is facilitating this.
Click to expand...

Really ignorant question here:

Seeing on other boards people saying Madeline Albright is responsible for the death of 500,000+ Iraqis.

Is what she did any different then the above or what has been done to North Korea for ages etc?
 
all of it is ghoulish behaviour to be certain. one can discuss the varying degrees, but it all comes down a terrorist state imposing its will and inflicting misery all over the world. the US is the largest terror organization in the world and, quite frankly, it needs to be stopped. Albright was yet another architect of the racist, capitalist, imperialist war on the global south
 
VolcanicDynamo said:
So, the economic sanctions being placed on Russia...don't seem to really be working, huh? Let's ignore the hypocracy of putting sanctions on Russia, a hyperagressive nation encroaching on a neighboring nation, but doing nothing against Israel, another hyperagressive nation encroaching on a neighboring nation. We know why that's the case. Let's focus solely on its effectiveness. All the big corporations pulling out, things like Google or PayPal, seem to primarily hurt the average Russian citizen without stopping the war or affecting the people in power pushing for and continuing military action. Then we just have different groups basically blocking or banning anything related to Russia, which serves...what purpose, exactly?

Russia is the clear aggressor here. I'm not defending the actions of its government or its military, and I firmly want Ukraine to pull through here. I also will readily admit that I have lots to learn when it comes to global politics. But I don't see how this is actually stopping Russia's military action.
Click to expand...
Late response, but sanctions aren't supposed to work immediately. They server a purpose to limit what a country can do. For example, the sanctions placed on Russia in 2014 has prevented them for accelerating many of their military goals, making them a weaker power today than they would have been otherwise. Since you posted this on the 3rd, there was no way sanctions were going to work in a few days and bring down a massive power like Russia with the snap of a finger.

The idea is to hurt their capability of funding this war in the long term. If the Russian economy is hurt, than the sanctions are working.
 
KC Hazel said:
Late response, but sanctions aren't supposed to work immediately. They server a purpose to limit what a country can do. For example, the sanctions placed on Russia in 2014 has prevented them for accelerating many of their military goals, making them a weaker power today than they would have been otherwise. Since you posted this on the 3rd, there was no way sanctions were going to work in a few days and bring down a massive power like Russia with the snap of a finger.

The idea is to hurt their capability of funding this war in the long term. If the Russian economy is hurt, than the sanctions are working.
Click to expand...
Weakened them militarily how? Certainly didn’t stop them from pursuing a devastating invasion of Ukraine, and further sanctions have not stopped their continued military campaign. Sanctions primarily harm the ordinary citizens of the country being sanctioned; oligarchs are pretty much sheltered from the effects of sanctions.

Russia doesn’t seem to be dominating Ukraine militarily, but that was inevitable regardless of western sanctions policy. This was not a war they could conceivably win, just as Iraq and Afghanistan were foolish pursuits of American imperialism destined for failure, with disastrous consequences for the people of those countries. Same goes for Vietnam. The US lost those conflicts without being sanctioned, for many of the same reasons that Russia finds themselves mired in the swamp of their own making now. In what way does preventing ordinary Russians from accessing their bank accounts, or preventing them from buying necessities, stop the Russian war machine? We all know Russia is not responsive to democrat demands of its citizenry. So the suffering caused by sanctions are supposedly…bringing about the same result that would’ve happened without them, except more suffering is inflicted? Not a great argument for sanctions policy.
 
Koyota said:
Really ignorant question here:

Seeing on other boards people saying Madeline Albright is responsible for the death of 500,000+ Iraqis.

Is what she did any different then the above or what has been done to North Korea for ages etc?
Click to expand...
If you’re asking if sanctions policy against North Korea has been similarly disastrous and ineffectual, then the answer is yes.
 
EddyZacianLand said:
Americans, I have to ask you something, I know millions of Americans don't trust the federal government, so would UHC actually work over there?
I don't see a reason why it shouldn't exist.
Click to expand...
People don’t trust the federal government here because it provides barely any essential services to better the lives of citizens, and most interactions people have with the federal government are through taxation and law enforcement, with very little benefit to show for it.

Universal Healthcare would alleviate this problem, as the US state would finally be providing a tangible benefit directly to everyone. UHC polls very well with Americans so it’s not some sort of lack of desire from Americans that is preventing universal coverage
 
Ostia said:
Weakened them militarily how? Certainly didn’t stop them from pursuing a devastating invasion of Ukraine, and further sanctions have not stopped their continued military campaign. Sanctions primarily harm the ordinary citizens of the country being sanctioned; oligarchs are pretty much sheltered from the effects of sanctions.

Russia doesn’t seem to be dominating Ukraine militarily, but that was inevitable regardless of western sanctions policy. This was not a war they could conceivably win, just as Iraq and Afghanistan were foolish pursuits of American imperialism destined for failure, with disastrous consequences for the people of those countries. Same goes for Vietnam. The US lost those conflicts without being sanctioned, for many of the same reasons that Russia finds themselves mired in the swamp of their own making now. In what way does preventing ordinary Russians from accessing their bank accounts, or preventing them from buying necessities, stop the Russian war machine? We all know Russia is not responsive to democrat demands of its citizenry. So the suffering caused by sanctions are supposedly…bringing about the same result that would’ve happened without them, except more suffering is inflicted? Not a great argument for sanctions policy.
Click to expand...
What is happening in Ukraine is very different from wars like Iraq, where the US easily defeated the Iraqi military but struggled to enforce it's will on the people. In Ukraine, the Russian military is losing to the Ukraine military. Most experts where imagining an Iraq scenario where Russia would quickly take over, then struggle with insurgencies.

Countries need money to fund wars, the Russian economy was hit hard by previous US sanctions and thus the military budget was cut. Also on the sanction list were high tech components required for precision missiles, which as we can see, Russia is sorely lacking. Sanctions alone can't bring down a military power like Russia, but they have surely weakened them, giving Ukraine a better chance to defend themselves.

Russia simply can't spend money they don't have to fund their military. It's why they seemed so much stronger on paper than they are in reality.
 
KC Hazel said:
What is happening in Ukraine is very different from wars like Iraq, where the US easily defeated the Iraqi military but struggled to enforce it's will on the people. In Ukraine, the Russian military is losing to the Ukraine military. Most experts where imagining an Iraq scenario where Russia would quickly take over, then struggle with insurgencies.

Countries need money to fund wars, the Russian economy was hit hard by previous US sanctions and thus the military budget was cut. Also on the sanction list were high tech components required for precision missiles, which as we can see, Russia is sorely lacking. Sanctions alone can't bring down a military power like Russia, but they have surely weakened them, giving Ukraine a better chance to defend themselves.

Russia simply can't spend money they don't have to fund their military. It's why they seemed so much stronger on paper than they are in reality.
Click to expand...
It’s not that different when you have such a heavily armed and militarized populace as Ukraine, it’s basically like fighting a military and insurgency (i.e. experienced paramilitary groups) at the same time. Also wouldn’t be accurate to say that the Ukrainian military is winning (as in defeating Russia’s military and driving them out of the country); they have stalled the Russian military’s advance and inflicted pretty significant casualties. Which has always been the “best case” scenario for the Ukrainian military anyway, full defeat of Russia and pushing them out of the country is near impossible for them to do. Regardless, sanctions have very little to do with the military situation on the ground.

Russia still has money, Russia still has resources to divert towards the war effort, that has not changed significantly due to sanctions. The Russian state can and has been diverting resources toward the war and cracking down heavily on dissent, and will likely continue to do so. The Russian military is not suffering for resources from the sanctions, the Russian people are. Even if you could make the case that Russia’s military capacity was significantly impacted by the sanctions, you would have to weigh that against the immorality of forcing the suffering onto millions of people who did not choose and do not want this war, which is an extremely hard case to make. But the fact of the matter is that the sanctions, while crippling the economy and inflicting incredible hardship on normal Russian citizens, has done little to impede the Russian war machine. “Countries need money to fund wars” is an absurd oversimplification and inaccurate to describe the resources of the Russian military at this time.

Instead you are left with a prolonged war in which both the Ukrainian and Russian people suffer over a situation they have very little control over, which has become a quagmire and which sanctions have done very little to impede the Russian invasion and a ton to immiserate the Russian people
 
Ostia said:
It’s not that different when you have such a heavily armed and militarized populace as Ukraine, it’s basically like fighting a military and insurgency (i.e. experienced paramilitary groups) at the same time. Also wouldn’t be accurate to say that the Ukrainian military is winning (as in defeating Russia’s military and driving them out of the country); they have stalled the Russian military’s advance and inflicted pretty significant casualties. Which has always been the “best case” scenario for the Ukrainian military anyway, full defeat of Russia and pushing them out of the country is near impossible for them to do. Regardless, sanctions have very little to do with the military situation on the ground.

Russia still has money, Russia still has resources to divert towards the war effort, that has not changed significantly due to sanctions. The Russian state can and has been diverting resources toward the war and cracking down heavily on dissent, and will likely continue to do so. The Russian military is not suffering for resources from the sanctions, the Russian people are. Even if you could make the case that Russia’s military capacity was significantly impacted by the sanctions, you would have to weigh that against the immorality of forcing the suffering onto millions of people who did not choose and do not want this war, which is an extremely hard case to make. But the fact of the matter is that the sanctions, while crippling the economy and inflicting incredible hardship on normal Russian citizens, has done little to impede the Russian war machine. “Countries need money to fund wars” is an absurd oversimplification and inaccurate to describe the resources of the Russian military at this time.

Instead you are left with a prolonged war in which both the Ukrainian and Russian people suffer over a situation they have very little control over, which has become a quagmire and which sanctions have done very little to impede the Russian invasion and a ton to immiserate the Russian people
Click to expand...
Countries needing money to fund wars is not an oversimplification. It's 100 percent true. I never said the sanctions removed all their money, of course it didn't, Russia is a major military power and they have a ton of natural resources, as well as a huge population of 145 million people. Sanctions were never going to immediately bring Russia to their knees. Of course they've done little at this time. Sanctions are a long term economic play.

However the Russia government collected far less money after the Obama sanctions, which meant the military budget saw significant cuts. We're seeing on the ground that the Russian military was far better on paper than it is in reality because they didn't have the money for maintenance and upkeep. A country can only spend so much of it's GDP on military so if you cut a countries GDP, you effect their ability to wage war.

You don't have to agree with sanctions being the right call, but to say they have no effect on defense spending is just inaccurate. If they hurt the Russian economy, it will effect the government's ability to wage long term war. If they don't harm the economy, then it means the people aren't effected. The less money Russia generates, the less they have to spend on the war.
 
Sanctions may make it more difficult for Russian citizens to withdraw money or buy things.

But they also make it more difficult for Russia to buy more missiles, tanks and bombs that result in even more dead Ukranian citizens. Russia is currently having to bus in mercs from Syria because their logistics have been so badly messed up during their conflict.

I'm perfectly happy for my country to cut economic ties with a Fascistic hypercapitalist autocracy that's engaged in the most overt bit of imperialist empire building of the 21st century.
 
KC Hazel said:
Countries needing money to fund wars is not an oversimplification. It's 100 percent true. I never said the sanctions removed all their money, of course it didn't, Russia is a major military power and they have a ton of natural resources, as well as a huge population of 145 million people. Sanctions were never going to immediately bring Russia to their knees. Of course they've done little at this time. Sanctions are a long term economic play.

However the Russia government collected far less money after the Obama sanctions, which meant the military budget saw significant cuts. We're seeing on the ground that the Russian military was far better on paper than it is in reality because they didn't have the money for maintenance and upkeep. A country can only spend so much of it's GDP on military so if you cut a countries GDP, you effect their ability to wage war.

You don't have to agree with sanctions being the right call, but to say they have no effect on defense spending is just inaccurate. If they hurt the Russian economy, it will effect the government's ability to wage long term war. If they don't harm the economy, then it means the people aren't effected. The less money Russia generates, the less they have to spend on the war.
Click to expand...
I’m saying they have very little impact on this war, which is the justification being used to pursue them. You’re already giving away the game here, the object isn’t to stop the war but to weaken the Russian state and immiserate the Russian people over a long period of time, regardless of what happens to Ukraine.
 
JazzPotatoes said:
Sanctions may make it more difficult for Russian citizens to withdraw money or buy things.

But they also make it more difficult for Russia to buy more missiles, tanks and bombs that result in even more dead Ukranian citizens. Russia is currently having to bus in mercs from Syria because their logistics have been so badly messed up during their conflict.

I'm perfectly happy for my country to cut economic ties with a Fascistic hypercapitalist autocracy that's engaged in the most overt bit of imperialist empire building of the 21st century.
Click to expand...
Their logistics being bad isn’t a direct result of sanctions either, these are all factors that exist without sanctions. Same goes for busing in mercenaries, which they are doing because they have taken so many losses. They were not capable of waging this conflict the way they thought they were, sanctions are not the reason for that. Part of why so many thought Russia wouldn’t invade is because of how obviously disastrous doing so would be. That has born itself out clearly from the conflict, at the expense of the Ukrainian people suffering under conflict and the Russian people suffering under sanctions

Hope you support your country to cut economic ties with the US as well. Iirc “your country” is the UK, right?
 
Ostia said:
I’m saying they have very little impact on this war, which is the justification being used to pursue them. You’re already giving away the game here, the object isn’t to stop the war but to weaken the Russian state and immiserate the Russian people over a long period of time, regardless of what happens to Ukraine.
Click to expand...
If you weaken their ability to wage a long term war, they'll eventually pull out of Ukraine. That's the idea. It wasn't going to work over night, but the US has been training Ukraine for a long term occupation/government in exile style battle that will ultimately end with Russia giving up because the ends don't justify the means.

There is no instant win option, and no one expected sanctions to be that.

Also I should add, if Russia succeeds easily in Ukraine, they weren't planning on stopping there. We should weaken them now in any way we can that doesn't include WW3.
 
JazzPotatoes said:
Sanctions may make it more difficult for Russian citizens to withdraw money or buy things.

But they also make it more difficult for Russia to buy more missiles, tanks and bombs that result in even more dead Ukranian citizens. Russia is currently having to bus in mercs from Syria because their logistics have been so badly messed up during their conflict.

I'm perfectly happy for my country to cut economic ties with a Fascistic hypercapitalist autocracy that's engaged in the most overt bit of imperialist empire building of the 21st century.
Click to expand...
This is fucking rich coming from a Brit whose Prime Minister pushed for the invasion of Iraq
 
Mekanos said:
This is fucking rich coming from a Brit whose Prime Minister pushed for the invasion of Iraq
Click to expand...
I won't speak for the person you quoted but why is he responsible for the actions of his Prime Minister? I'm an American and my president who I didn't vote for or support, invaded Iraq. Does this mean I have to be in favor of all acts of aggression around the world now because my country did it against my will?
 
KC Hazel said:
I won't speak for the person you quoted but why is he responsible for the actions of his Prime Minister? I'm an American and my president who I didn't vote for or support, invaded Iraq. Does this mean I have to be in favor of all acts of aggression around the world now because my country did it against my will?
Click to expand...
No, I'm saying there's no universe where the invasion of Iraq is not a form of empire building equivalent to the invasion of Ukraine.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom